Protecting George Pell

Not Important

never test the depth of water with both feet.
Oct 4, 2016
7,243
11,411
AFL Club
Richmond
when priests are being shuffled around, people know something is going on with them

just because you are not witnessing the event doesnt mean you dont have enough suspicion to raise questions with the appropriate people (and god forbid maybe the police)
he was a party to a lot of it tho. anyone who suggests (not you) he wasn't well aware of what was occurring and turned a blind eye is blind to reality. and there's lots of unanswered questions about his own behaviour.
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
18,276
19,361
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Liverpool
No, it’s not on Pell alone.

But he is/was the 3rd highest ranking Catholic in their entire cult and this thread is about him.
His life is so meaningless but you spend all your time on here pushing for lockdowns and to lock everyone up. The High Court came back with 7-0 against your witch-hunt. It’s time to move on. Just like the economy will collapse if we follow your stupid lock everything down mantra.
 

Christopher Buttersnip

Beware of the Drop Bears
Oct 28, 2020
4,020
10,243
AFL Club
Melbourne
His life is so meaningless but you spend all your time on here pushing for lockdowns and to lock everyone up. The High Court came back with 7-0 against your witch-hunt. It’s time to move on. Just like the economy will collapse if we follow your stupid lock everything down mantra.
What about him knowing about the child abuse and doing nothing about it? And strong allegations he attempted to cover it up to protect the church. Do we move on from that as well?

If the talk about town is correct there's more to come legally so get use to this dragging out for sometime yet.

And Pell is doing his bit to keep it all alive by continuing to put himself front and centre by doing interviews. With the help of his minions like biased Bruce.
 
Last edited:

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
18,276
19,361
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Liverpool
What about him knowing about the child abuse and doing nothing about? And strong allegations he attempted to cover it up to protect the church. Do we move on from that as well?

If the talk about town is correct there's more to come legally so get use to this dragging out for sometime yet.

And Pell is doing his bit to keep it all alive by continuing to put himself front and centre by doing interviews. With the help of his minions like biased Bruce.
If there’s more to come then so be it. Until then the coverup allegations are just that.
 
He was found to be not guilty. You’re wrong. And spineless.
Oh OK. Should I post some anti-Semitic stuff too? Just to prove whatever it is you want me to prove? I can hate on the Buddhists if you like?
 
Sep 30, 2008
14,336
17,809
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
If there’s more to come then so be it. Until then the coverup allegations are just that.
Actually No. There was a Royal Commission that found otherwise. He wasn’t the Lone Ranger, but he knew and did nothing.

When you add in the allegations and charges that he has been hit with and the civil suits - settled quickly and quietly without any claims being filed in Court, only an ideological fool would think otherwise.

A Paedophile part of the crew isn’t going to do anything about one of his own - that’s it in no a 🥜
 
Last edited:

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
18,276
19,361
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Liverpool
Actually No. There was a Royal Commission that found otherwise. He wasn’t the Lone Ranger, but he knew and did nothing.

When you add in the allegations and charges that he has been hit with and the civil suits - settled quickly and quietly without any claims being filed in Court, only an ideological fool would think otherwise.

A Paedophile part of the crew isn’t going to do anything about one of his own - that’s it in no a 🥜
I’ve read the transcripts from the RC and there’s very little in the way of proof that says that Pell knew anything besides rumours. If you come up to me and said I think that Epstein was rooting kids, that isn’t evidence.
Then you have posters on here giving us their version of what they think they read or heard. No, that isn’t proof no matter what Cryptic thinks.
If posters in here are going to make allegations at least quote what is in the RC transcripts instead of making things up.
 

Lebbo73

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2014
18,276
19,361
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Liverpool
Btw, have you thought that the Catholic Church is settling these civil suits out of court so as to make them disappear. Quite a lot of them would be genuine but a fair few would be regarded as not worth the fight. Plenty of lawsuits have been settled in the past so as not to have people drag your name through the mud.
 
Jan 13, 2007
14,553
17,676
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Actually No. There was a Royal Commission that found otherwise. He wasn’t the Lone Ranger, but he knew and did nothing.

When you add in the allegations and charges that he has been hit with and the civil suits - settled quickly and quietly without any claims being filed in Court, only an ideological fool would think otherwise.

A Paedophile part of the crew isn’t going to do anything about one of his own - that’s it in no a 🥜

I’ve said it before. The Royal Commission findings against Pell are not supported by the evidence.

They’re the predictable outcome of a left wing judge appointed by a Fabian prime minister. No different really to the embarrassment that was Judge Maxwell’s SCA judgment.

How else is the finding regarding Paul Bongiorno to be explained?
 
Last edited:
Sep 30, 2008
14,336
17,809
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
I’ve said it before. The Royal Commission findings against Pell are not supported by the evidence.

They’re the predictable outcome of a left wing judge appointed by a Fabian prime minister. No different really to the embarrassment that was Judge Maxwell’s SCA judgment.

How else is the finding regarding Paul Bongiorno to be explained?
Paul Bongiorno was in Warrnambool briefly with Ridsdale in 1972 - he met a woman and left - there is no comparison with George Pell - you’re an idiot for trying
 
Jul 13, 2015
36,297
40,457
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Paul Bongiorno was in Warrnambool briefly with Ridsdale in 1972 - he met a woman and left - there is no comparison with George Pell - you’re an idiot for trying

Bongiorno lived with Pell and pedo priest. He got a free pass and Pell was accused of turning a blind eye despite all 3 being at the same level in the church.
 
Sep 30, 2008
14,336
17,809
Western Victoria
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Chelsea
Ironic.

Did Bongiorno not live with Ridsdale when he was raping boys ?
It’s about knowledge - if Bongiorno says he didn’t know in ‘72 - who am I to doubt him - but by the middle to late 70’s everyone in the know knew and that includes George Pell - their is a reason that CCI (Catholic Church Insurances) stopped indemnifying the Ballarat Diocese after 1975. Using Bongiorno as a comparison is just a diversion - he was busy deciding what to do about a woman - there were lots of Assistant Priests there - it’s fundamentally crap.
Not one Bishop told the truth at the Royal Commission - it was no leftist crusade - the Commissioners made findings because the sad pathetic campaigners couldn’t admit that they’re whole life is a sham and they’re all owned by each other - this isn’t just a “gut feel” - for the past 6/7 years it’s become my life - I know way more about this sick cult and the connections between the rock spiders and the gay priests and how each section looked after the other. The Church is full of weak pathetic men living a lie that will do anything to keep their sordid secrets
 
Last edited:

Christopher Buttersnip

Beware of the Drop Bears
Oct 28, 2020
4,020
10,243
AFL Club
Melbourne
How about not hating anyone? Tried that? Maybe make it a new year’s resolution.
Talk about effrontery. You, accusing others of hate. You, who spends so much time here spewing venom at anyone who has been party to the Pell proceedings.

You, who has smeared the primary witness most egregiously, without a skerrick of evidence.

You, who excuses Monsignor Portelli for his lapses, but makes no allowances for the witness who was subjected to much more onerous attack over a longer time than Portelli.

You, who when it comes to the equally grievous issues of the Cardinal knowing of child abuse and doing nothing, makes excuses or gives it but passing attention.

You, who was not present at any of the material times (none) and who has based his "I know for sure" claptrap on a reconstruction from his time in the church in Dickensian times.

We know the Cardinal knew of child abuse in the church and turned away from the children at their time of need. We know he didn't see child abuse as his highest order priority because he said abortion - perhaps among other things like protecting the church - was a higher-order priority.

Just as you don't know whether he is guilty of the child molestation neither do we. What we know is there is reasonable doubt and he, therefore, deserves the benefit of that doubt.

What we are entitled to do is ask why he didn't act to protect his young flock when he was in a position to do so and why he didn't see it as the highest order priority. Albeit he wasn't Robinson Crusoe when it came to that dereliction of responsibility.
 
Back